Influence of migration on the thought process of individuals at ultra-high risk for psychosis

Review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the United States

Background

Since its inception, research in the clinical high-risk (CHR) phase of psychosis has included identifying and exploring the impact of relevant socio-demographic factors. Employing a narrative review approach and highlighting work from the United States, sociocultural and contextual factors potentially affecting the screening, assessment, and service utilization of youth at CHR were reviewed from the current literature.

Results

Existing literature suggests that contextual factors impact the predictive performance of widely used psychosis-risk screening tools and may introduce systemic bias and challenges to differential diagnosis in clinical assessment. Factors reviewed include racialized identity, discrimination, neighborhood context, trauma, immigration status, gender identity, sexual orientation, and age. Furthermore, racialized identity and traumatic experiences appear related to symptom severity and service utilization among this population.

Conclusions

Collectively, a growing body of research from the United States and beyond suggests that considering context in psychosis-risk assessment can provide a more accurate appraisal of the nature of risk for psychosis, render more accurate results improving the field's prediction of conversion to psychosis, and enhance our understanding of psychosis-risk trajectories. More work is needed in the U.S. and across the globe to uncover how structural racism and systemic biases impact screening, assessment, treatment, and clinical and functional outcomes for those at CHR.

Equity in Mental Health Services for Youth at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Considering Marginalized Identities and Stressors

Prevention and early intervention programs have been initiated worldwide to serve youth at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis (CHR-P), who are adolescents and young adults experiencing subclinical psychosis and functional impairment. The primary goals of these efforts are to prevent or mitigate the onset of clinical psychosis, while also treating comorbid issues. It is important to consider issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion in CHR-P work, especially as these programs continue to proliferate around the world. Further, there is a long history in psychiatry of misdiagnosing and mistreating psychosis in individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups. Although there have been significant developments in early intervention psychosis work, there is evidence that marginalized groups are underserved by current CHR-P screening and intervention efforts. These issues are compounded by the contexts of continued social marginalization and significant mental health disparities in general child/adolescent services. Within this narrative review and call to action, we use an intersectional and minority stress lens to review and discuss current issues related to equity in CHR-P services, offer evidence-based recommendations, and propose next steps. In particular, our intersectional and minority stress lenses incorporate perspectives for a range of marginalized and underserved identities related to race, ethnicity, and culture; faith; immigration status; geography/residence; gender identity; sexual orientation; socioeconomic status/class; and ability status.

More than a biomarker: could language be a biosocial marker of psychosis?

Automated extraction of quantitative linguistic features has the potential to predict objectively the onset and progression of psychosis. These linguistic variables are often considered to be biomarkers, with a large emphasis placed on the pathological aberrations in the biological processes that underwrite the faculty of language in psychosis. This perspective offers a reminder that human language is primarily a social device that is biologically implemented. As such, linguistic aberrations in patients with psychosis reflect both social and biological processes affecting an individual. Failure to consider the sociolinguistic aspects of NLP measures will limit their usefulness as digital tools in clinical settings. In the context of psychosis, considering language as a biosocial marker could lead to less biased and more accessible tools for patient-specific predictions in the clinic.